PUEBLO - Local ranchers and state representatives are opposing a U.S. Air Force plan to conduct low-altitude training flights over parts of southern Colorado and northern New Mexico.

The low-altitude tactical navigation (LATN) area - consisting of about 36 Colorado and 19 New Mexico counties - would be used by turboprop aircraft - the C-22 Osprey and C-130 Hercules - from Cannon Air Force Base near Clovis, N.M. The Air Force says training would consist of three mission flights during a 24-hour period, with most flights to occur after dusk and 95 percent of the flights to occur Monday through Friday, for a total of close to 700 flights per year. The planes would fly at altitudes of 200 to 3,000 feet.

On the steps of the Pueblo County Courthouse Saturday afternoon, state Reps. Wes McKinley, Sal Pace and Ed Vigil, along with members - many of them area ranchers - of the Piñon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition and the Sierra Club, voiced their concerns about the planned LATN area. Issues addressed included possible noise disruptions and potential backdoor ties to the U.S. Army's desired expansion of the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site.

"They claim it's for mountain training, and that's why they have to pick Colorado and New Mexico, but that makes me wonder why they have to pick the San Luis Valley, which is flat, or most of southeastern Colorado, which is all flat," Pace said.

McKinley, whose district includes Las Animas County, focused primarily on the high-decibel levels of noise that low-level training flights could cause, noting that noise regulations exist for a number of other industries.

"Look at our oil and gas regulations, and we have standards in there for how much noise can come out of a location. Drive down the highway, and we could've filled a lot of potholes, we could've built some bridges for what we've done to stop the noise from going into houses (using sound-dampening walls)," McKinley said. "We have a duty to protect the people of Colorado, and that noise can be a problem. The Constitution says you have a right to be comfortable in your home...there's standards out there for noise. No one is above the law, and the military is the same."

McKinley later told The Times Independent he planned to investigate the possible protections that trespass laws could afford citizens in relation to potential impacts by the low-level flights.

"You own the surface above your home, so if that flight impacts you, maybe there's a trespass law," he said, also mentioning the possibility of enlisting the Colorado Division of Wildlife's support because of the potential disruption of wildlife migratory habits.

Vigil expressed his concern that the low-altitude flights violated private property rights, as well as the different types of disruption they could potentially cause in southern Colorado.

"We have a lot of sacred places in Colorado...that aren't marked on the map. People that come to meditate, come to do some praying and stuff like that, enjoying just the solitude of just the sounds of nature, will be violated with all these noises," he said, also citing potential disruption to wildlife and state and national parks areas. 

Pace and others voiced concern that if the Air Force could open the air space around southeast Colorado to training maneuvers, it could provide an additional argument for the U.S. Army in its ongoing attempts to expand the 235,000-acre Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site (PCMS) northeast of Trinidad. Piñon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition (PCEOC) President Lon Robertson said that in addition to concerns about the low-altitude flights' impacts on livestock, the PCEOC is concerned that the flights were part of "the onslaught of efforts to take over more private property and private property rights...we have concerns about where this stops."

The U.S. Department of Defense issued a waiver in February 2007 on its own moratorium on major land acquisitions to allow for a 418,577-acre expansion at the PCMS. However, a map obtained during expansion opposition group Not 1 More Acre!'s lawsuit against the Army showed that proposed acquisition to be just the first phase of a multi-phase plan that culminated in the site expanding to 6.9 million acres, swallowing most of southeast Colorado and displacing an estimated 17,000-plus residents.

A congressional ban is currently in place to prevent the Army from expending funds to expand the site.

The public comment period for the required environmental assessment for the proposed LATN plan ends Oct. 4.

"It's imperative that the citizens of southeastern Colorado, if they want their voice heard, to get their comments in," Pace said. "The Air Force is doing what's called an (environmental assessment - EA)...it is the lowest possible environmental standard for reviewing something like this, and the law says that if there's any significant impacts, you're required to do a more comprehensive environmental study called an (environmental impact statement - EIS). I think it's clear that 200 feet over wildlife or over cattle or over our community is significant impact.

"It's imperative on the Air Force to do a full environmental study, and not shortchange the citizens of southern Colorado with a half-ass study."

Ross Benson of the Sierra Club said that his organization was "deeply concerned" that the EA the military was conducting on the proposed LATN area was of insufficient thoroughness to accurately gauge the environmental impacts of the training flights.

"This is fairly common within the Pentagon system, for the Armed Forces to propose initially to do an (EA) followed by a finding of no significant impact...and if no one objects, they get away with it," he said. "Even though the purpose of the (EA) is to allow the agency and the public to understand exactly what's proposed and what the impacts of that proposal will be...the Pentagon routinely tries to get around that by using this low-grade process that doesn't include all the information either the agency or the public needs."

The Air Force had previously proposed a LATN for B-1 bombers to train over northern New Mexico in the mid-1990s, but that plan never came to fruition after it was opposed by ranchers, farmers, environmentalists and congressional representatives.

"There's a lot of places where the proposed flight patterns could be going, other than across our ranchlands in southeastern Colorado and across our communities...which, as we can all attest to, today, is not mountainous," Pace said.

Public comment can be provided to the Air Force through Oct. 4 by calling (575) 784-4131, by fax at (575) 784-7412, or e-mailing 27SOWpublicaffairs@cannon.af.mil.